Post by c***@gmail.comhttp://www.vmssoftware.com/pdfs/VSI_Roadmap_20161205.pdfI do not have an updated State of the Port. Sorry about that but I'll try to get to it soon.

I am especially interested in one item under "Research Areas" titled "MariaDB"

We have quite a bit of experience running MariaDB-5.5-25 on OpenVMS where very large databases experience shutdown problems (at least when using the InnoDB Engine)

We recently tested MariaDB-10.1.19 on CentOS-5 (our development OpenVMS platform is sending SQL requests to the Linux box over a private network). MariaDB is now behaving properly but introducing Linux into the mix has introduced new issues. (not to mention that CentOS-5 will not be supported after March 2017 and, we can’t get CentOS-6 or 7 running on our ancient DL360-G5)

Post by Neil RieckI am especially interested in one item under "Research Areas" titled "MariaDB"We have quite a bit of experience running MariaDB-5.5-25 on OpenVMS where very large databases experience shutdown problems (at least when using the InnoDB Engine)We recently tested MariaDB-10.1.19 on CentOS-5 (our development OpenVMS platform is sending SQL requests to the Linux box over a private network). MariaDB is now behaving properly but introducing Linux into the mix has introduced new issues. (not to mention that CentOS-5 will not be supported after March 2017 and, we can’t get CentOS-6 or 7 running on our ancient DL360-G5)A modern version of MariaDB on OpenVMS would solve all our problems.

Post by c***@gmail.comhttp://www.vmssoftware.com/pdfs/VSI_Roadmap_20161205.pdfI do not have an updated State of the Port. Sorry about that but I'll try to get to it soon.

Thank you once again Clair.

I don't know what others think, but I think both documents servevery different purposes.

I see the Roadmap as more of a longer term planning document thatallows people to do some initial planning. However, the State ofthe Port document allows one to see actual progress being made,quarter by quarter, in the VMS x86-64 port and allows a person tobuild confidence that the Roadmap plans for VMS will actually happen.

For me, it's all about VSI projecting an image that the port ison track (because most things in the Roadmap depend on the x86-64port being successful) and the State of the Port document gives youmore immediate feedback that this is happening.

Simon.

--Simon Clubley, ***@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFPMicrosoft: Bringing you 1980s technology to a 21st century world

Post by c***@gmail.comhttp://www.vmssoftware.com/pdfs/VSI_Roadmap_20161205.pdfI do not have an updated State of the Port. Sorry about that but I'lltry to get to it soon.

Thanks!

I miss one thing that was mentioned by the VSI folks (I think itwas, or if it was someone from HP) at the presentations held duringthe event at IKEA IT HQ a month ago.

It was mentioned that, together with this once-in-a-lifetime releaseof an VSI Alpha OpenVMS kit, there would also be a support option togo with that release. And it was also mentioned that any such Alphasupport contract signed for 3 years (or more) would include a freelicense migration to the VSI x86-64 OpenVMS version, when available.

This Alpha support was ment as an "stepping stone" between theend of HP support and the release of the x86-64 version.

This is also in line with the update of the VSI Support web page.For those who haven't noticed, see "Right to Major Versions:" here:http://vmssoftware.com/services_supp.html. I think that has beenadded fairly reasently.

Post by c***@gmail.comhttp://www.vmssoftware.com/pdfs/VSI_Roadmap_20161205.pdfI do not have an updated State of the Port. Sorry about that but I'lltry to get to it soon.

I miss one thing that was mentioned by the VSI folks (I think itwas, or if it was someone from HP) at the presentations held duringthe event at IKEA IT HQ a month ago.It was mentioned that, together with this once-in-a-lifetime releaseof an VSI Alpha OpenVMS kit, there would also be a support option togo with that release. And it was also mentioned that any such Alphasupport contract signed for 3 years (or more) would include a freelicense migration to the VSI x86-64 OpenVMS version, when available.

To be clear, it's not a "support option". If you want the licenseto run VSI OpenVMS Alpha V8.4-2L1, you need to pay for support, andessentially get the licenses for free. One cannot pay for the licensesand decline support, technically, although I suppose you could pay forsupport but refuse to use it. In any event, there is no optionfor HPE support; only VSI will support OpenVMS Alpha V8.4-2L1

It's my understanding that the license to run the software (the operating systemand layered products) does not have a termination date, such that one can payfor support for, say, three years, but continue to run the software after threeyears, but without support.

You get the licenses for all the layered products and SIPs, so if you've neverused Host-Based Volume Shadowing on Alpha, now is your chance to be dazzled bythe wonders of Host-Based Minimerge. If you've never experienced the wonders ofcluster formation, and the tingling feeling one gets at the console when you seethe OPCOM message "waiting to form or join an OpenVMS Cluster", your wait cansoon be over.

Post by c***@gmail.comhttp://www.vmssoftware.com/pdfs/VSI_Roadmap_20161205.pdfI do not have an updated State of the Port. Sorry about that butI'll try to get to it soon.

I miss one thing that was mentioned by the VSI folks (I think it was,or if it was someone from HP) at the presentations held during theevent at IKEA IT HQ a month ago.It was mentioned that, together with this once-in-a-lifetime releaseof an VSI Alpha OpenVMS kit, there would also be a support option togo with that release. And it was also mentioned that any such Alphasupport contract signed for 3 years (or more) would include a freelicense migration to the VSI x86-64 OpenVMS version, when available.

To be clear, it's not a "support option". If you want the license torun VSI OpenVMS Alpha V8.4-2L1, you need to pay for support, andessentially get the licenses for free. One cannot pay for the licensesand decline support, technically, although I suppose you could pay forsupport but refuse to use it. In any event, there is no option for HPEsupport; only VSI will support OpenVMS Alpha V8.4-2L1

Ah, thanks for that clarification. No problem with that. My customeris currently having the VMS support contract through a local resellerin Sweden and they have asked how they (the reseller) will handlethis for 2017. No information from them yet.

Is there some kind of price list available yet for the different(supported) Alpha boxes?

And was it correct that a 3 year (or more) contract includes a freemigration to x86-64 when available? Just as your support webb pagesays (in a slightly different wording). I guess that will be for thebase OS, not the LPs? But then, we haven't seen the licensing model yetfor the x86-64 version. I think a subscription model was mentioned bysomeone at the IKEA IT HQ meeting. More like a guess, I think. :-)

It's my understanding that the license to run the software (theoperating system and layered products) does not have a termination date,such that one can pay for support for, say, three years, but continue torun the software after three years, but without support.You get the licenses for all the layered products and SIPs,...

So for our three boxes (prod, test and dev), there would be the samesingle "all-included" licence? Including Fortran, C and Cobol compilersfor the dev box?

I must also check that "ABC Client" would run OK on VSI OpenVMS AlphaV8.4-2L1. https://storserver.com/software/storserver-software-abc/

And we also run Rdb and CDD... :-)

so ifyou've never used Host-Based Volume Shadowing on Alpha, now is yourchance to be dazzled by the wonders of Host-Based Minimerge. If you'venever experienced the wonders of cluster formation, and the tinglingfeeling one gets at the console when you see the OPCOM message "waitingto form or join an OpenVMS Cluster", your wait can soon be over.

Post by c***@gmail.comhttp://www.vmssoftware.com/pdfs/VSI_Roadmap_20161205.pdfI do not have an updated State of the Port. Sorry about that butI'll try to get to it soon.

I miss one thing that was mentioned by the VSI folks (I think it was,or if it was someone from HP) at the presentations held during theevent at IKEA IT HQ a month ago.It was mentioned that, together with this once-in-a-lifetime releaseof an VSI Alpha OpenVMS kit, there would also be a support option togo with that release. And it was also mentioned that any such Alphasupport contract signed for 3 years (or more) would include a freelicense migration to the VSI x86-64 OpenVMS version, when available.

To be clear, it's not a "support option". If you want the license torun VSI OpenVMS Alpha V8.4-2L1, you need to pay for support, andessentially get the licenses for free. One cannot pay for the licensesand decline support, technically, although I suppose you could pay forsupport but refuse to use it. In any event, there is no option for HPEsupport; only VSI will support OpenVMS Alpha V8.4-2L1

Ah, thanks for that clarification. No problem with that. My customeris currently having the VMS support contract through a local resellerin Sweden and they have asked how they (the reseller) will handlethis for 2017. No information from them yet.Is there some kind of price list available yet for the different(supported) Alpha boxes?And was it correct that a 3 year (or more) contract includes a freemigration to x86-64 when available?

I do believe that Robert indicated the "licenses" are free. That pretty muchanswers all your questions. Free is after all, "free". Just keep the supportactive, and as some would say, "Bob's your uncle".

Post by Jan-Erik SoderholmJust as your support webb pagesays (in a slightly different wording). I guess that will be for thebase OS, not the LPs? But then, we haven't seen the licensing model yetfor the x86-64 version. I think a subscription model was mentioned bysomeone at the IKEA IT HQ meeting. More like a guess, I think. :-)

It's my understanding that the license to run the software (theoperating system and layered products) does not have a termination date,such that one can pay for support for, say, three years, but continue torun the software after three years, but without support.You get the licenses for all the layered products and SIPs,...

So for our three boxes (prod, test and dev), there would be the samesingle "all-included" licence? Including Fortran, C and Cobol compilersfor the dev box?

That's not as clear. I'd hope that "testing" and "development" would be coveredunder some sort of developer program. After all, it's in VSI's best interestthat you can develop and test on VMS, so that you can run "production". It is"production" that generates the money, some of which can then be paid to VSI forsupport.

Post by Jan-Erik SoderholmI must also check that "ABC Client" would run OK on VSI OpenVMS AlphaV8.4-2L1. https://storserver.com/software/storserver-software-abc/And we also run Rdb and CDD... :-)

Very unfortunately, your relationship with Larry will most likely continue withhim taking large chunks of your cash ....

so ifyou've never used Host-Based Volume Shadowing on Alpha, now is yourchance to be dazzled by the wonders of Host-Based Minimerge. If you'venever experienced the wonders of cluster formation, and the tinglingfeeling one gets at the console when you see the OPCOM message "waitingto form or join an OpenVMS Cluster", your wait can soon be over.

Being a developer, I doubt I have any use of such products, other to recommendthey be used when needed ....

Post by c***@gmail.comhttp://www.vmssoftware.com/pdfs/VSI_Roadmap_20161205.pdfI do not have an updated State of the Port. Sorry about that butI'll try to get to it soon.

I miss one thing that was mentioned by the VSI folks (I think it was,or if it was someone from HP) at the presentations held during theevent at IKEA IT HQ a month ago.It was mentioned that, together with this once-in-a-lifetime releaseof an VSI Alpha OpenVMS kit, there would also be a support option togo with that release. And it was also mentioned that any such Alphasupport contract signed for 3 years (or more) would include a freelicense migration to the VSI x86-64 OpenVMS version, when available.

To be clear, it's not a "support option". If you want the license torun VSI OpenVMS Alpha V8.4-2L1, you need to pay for support, andessentially get the licenses for free. One cannot pay for the licensesand decline support, technically, although I suppose you could pay forsupport but refuse to use it. In any event, there is no option for HPEsupport; only VSI will support OpenVMS Alpha V8.4-2L1

Ah, thanks for that clarification. No problem with that. My customeris currently having the VMS support contract through a local resellerin Sweden and they have asked how they (the reseller) will handlethis for 2017. No information from them yet.Is there some kind of price list available yet for the different(supported) Alpha boxes?And was it correct that a 3 year (or more) contract includes a freemigration to x86-64 when available?

I do believe that Robert indicated the "licenses" are free. That prettymuch answers all your questions. Free is after all, "free". Just keep thesupport active, and as some would say, "Bob's your uncle".

What was described at the IKEA meeting was that you needed to sign upfor a 3-year support contact (or more). As I understand that, is thatit is not enough to just renew on a 1-year basis (for three years).

That is also in accordance with the writing in the support pagewhere it says:

"Right to Major Versions: Purchasing a support term of three years ormore directly from VMS Software, for any of the four support packages,grants rights to new major version releases, along with minor versionreleases, patches, updates, etc."

How do you interpret that, David?

And yes, it was not clear if the license covered normal LPs thatare used in a typica productin environment, or if it also includesthe compilers. This is a rather special support/licens setup, asI understand.

Post by Jan-Erik SoderholmJust as your support webb pagesays (in a slightly different wording). I guess that will be for thebase OS, not the LPs? But then, we haven't seen the licensing model yetfor the x86-64 version. I think a subscription model was mentioned bysomeone at the IKEA IT HQ meeting. More like a guess, I think. :-)

It's my understanding that the license to run the software (theoperating system and layered products) does not have a termination date,such that one can pay for support for, say, three years, but continue torun the software after three years, but without support.You get the licenses for all the layered products and SIPs,...

So for our three boxes (prod, test and dev), there would be the samesingle "all-included" licence? Including Fortran, C and Cobol compilersfor the dev box?

That's not as clear. I'd hope that "testing" and "development" would becovered under some sort of developer program. After all, it's in VSI'sbest interest that you can develop and test on VMS, so that you can run"production". It is "production" that generates the money, some of whichcan then be paid to VSI for support.

Post by Jan-Erik SoderholmI must also check that "ABC Client" would run OK on VSI OpenVMS AlphaV8.4-2L1. https://storserver.com/software/storserver-software-abc/And we also run Rdb and CDD... :-)

Very unfortunately, your relationship with Larry will most likely continuewith him taking large chunks of your cash ....

so ifyou've never used Host-Based Volume Shadowing on Alpha, now is yourchance to be dazzled by the wonders of Host-Based Minimerge. If you'venever experienced the wonders of cluster formation, and the tinglingfeeling one gets at the console when you see the OPCOM message "waitingto form or join an OpenVMS Cluster", your wait can soon be over.

Being a developer, I doubt I have any use of such products, other torecommend they be used when needed ....

Post by c***@gmail.comhttp://www.vmssoftware.com/pdfs/VSI_Roadmap_20161205.pdfI do not have an updated State of the Port. Sorry about that butI'll try to get to it soon.

I miss one thing that was mentioned by the VSI folks (I think it was,or if it was someone from HP) at the presentations held during theevent at IKEA IT HQ a month ago.It was mentioned that, together with this once-in-a-lifetime releaseof an VSI Alpha OpenVMS kit, there would also be a support option togo with that release. And it was also mentioned that any such Alphasupport contract signed for 3 years (or more) would include a freelicense migration to the VSI x86-64 OpenVMS version, when available.

To be clear, it's not a "support option". If you want the license torun VSI OpenVMS Alpha V8.4-2L1, you need to pay for support, andessentially get the licenses for free. One cannot pay for the licensesand decline support, technically, although I suppose you could pay forsupport but refuse to use it. In any event, there is no option for HPEsupport; only VSI will support OpenVMS Alpha V8.4-2L1

Ah, thanks for that clarification. No problem with that. My customeris currently having the VMS support contract through a local resellerin Sweden and they have asked how they (the reseller) will handlethis for 2017. No information from them yet.Is there some kind of price list available yet for the different(supported) Alpha boxes?And was it correct that a 3 year (or more) contract includes a freemigration to x86-64 when available?

I do believe that Robert indicated the "licenses" are free. That prettymuch answers all your questions. Free is after all, "free". Just keep thesupport active, and as some would say, "Bob's your uncle".

What was described at the IKEA meeting was that you needed to sign upfor a 3-year support contact (or more). As I understand that, is thatit is not enough to just renew on a 1-year basis (for three years).That is also in accordance with the writing in the support page"Right to Major Versions: Purchasing a support term of three years ormore directly from VMS Software, for any of the four support packages,grants rights to new major version releases, along with minor versionreleases, patches, updates, etc."How do you interpret that, David?

Well, I'm a bit worried about that. Yes, VSI needs money, now. But if theytake a bunch of 3-year payments up front, then where will the money come from inyears 2 and 3? Starts to look a bit like those "pyramid schemes". Long term,they fail.

But, if they are going to use a support type of billing, then it won't matterwhen someone wants to get support for VMS, they will sell it, that's theirbusiness. Can't really be any other way.

Frankly, even if they are pinched a bit now, and I don't know that, I thinktaking no more than a one year at a time payment would be best, thus insuringfuture income. Doesn't do any good to get the port done, just to go belly upbecause they already spend the support moneys.

Post by Jan-Erik SoderholmAnd yes, it was not clear if the license covered normal LPs thatare used in a typica productin environment, or if it also includesthe compilers. This is a rather special support/licens setup, asI understand.

I'm going to hope that they sell support for everything on production systems,and no cost for development and test systems. Now, that gets a bit tricky, whensomeone's business is development, which would sort of make their systems"production". But the other side is, development for VMS systems is in VSI'sbest interest.

[...] "Right to Major Versions: Purchasing a support term of threeyears or more directly from VMS Software, [...]

Well, I'm a bit worried about that. Yes, VSI needs money, now. But ifthey take a bunch of 3-year payments up front, then where will the moneycome from in years 2 and 3? Starts to look a bit like those "pyramidschemes". Long term, they fail.

I missed the part of the terms which demanded full payment inadvance. (Duh.)

[...] "Right to Major Versions: Purchasing a support term of threeyears or more directly from VMS Software, [...]

Well, I'm a bit worried about that. Yes, VSI needs money, now. But ifthey take a bunch of 3-year payments up front, then where will the moneycome from in years 2 and 3? Starts to look a bit like those "pyramidschemes". Long term, they fail.

Isn't that how it's always been, i.e., if you pay for three years ofsupport you pay *at the beginning*, thereby getting a better price peryear? That's how my magazine subscriptions work, and while I've neverbeen the contract administrator, I'm pretty sure that's how any VMSsupport contract I've ever seen has worked.

I don't really see the problem here. A port to a new architecture is amajor capital expense that doesn't happen every year. Maybe it's a goodthing HP is discontinuing Alpha support in 2017 -- more folks flockingto VSI right when VSI needs to grow a bit.

And I suspect a lot of people on Alpha don't even have support, so forthe subset of them that are paying attention and might want to move tox86_64 eventually, giving them an opportunity to fund that effort nowwhile immediately getting the support and patches they've been doingwithout seems like a win for everybody.

Post by c***@gmail.comhttp://www.vmssoftware.com/pdfs/VSI_Roadmap_20161205.pdfI do not have an updated State of the Port. Sorry about that butI'll try to get to it soon.

I miss one thing that was mentioned by the VSI folks (I think it was,or if it was someone from HP) at the presentations held during theevent at IKEA IT HQ a month ago.It was mentioned that, together with this once-in-a-lifetime releaseof an VSI Alpha OpenVMS kit, there would also be a support option togo with that release. And it was also mentioned that any such Alphasupport contract signed for 3 years (or more) would include a freelicense migration to the VSI x86-64 OpenVMS version, when available.

To be clear, it's not a "support option". If you want the license torun VSI OpenVMS Alpha V8.4-2L1, you need to pay for support, andessentially get the licenses for free. One cannot pay for the licensesand decline support, technically, although I suppose you could pay forsupport but refuse to use it. In any event, there is no option for HPEsupport; only VSI will support OpenVMS Alpha V8.4-2L1

Ah, thanks for that clarification. No problem with that. My customeris currently having the VMS support contract through a local resellerin Sweden and they have asked how they (the reseller) will handlethis for 2017. No information from them yet.Is there some kind of price list available yet for the different(supported) Alpha boxes?And was it correct that a 3 year (or more) contract includes a freemigration to x86-64 when available?

I do believe that Robert indicated the "licenses" are free. That prettymuch answers all your questions. Free is after all, "free". Just keep thesupport active, and as some would say, "Bob's your uncle".

What was described at the IKEA meeting was that you needed to sign upfor a 3-year support contact (or more). As I understand that, is thatit is not enough to just renew on a 1-year basis (for three years).That is also in accordance with the writing in the support page"Right to Major Versions: Purchasing a support term of three years ormore directly from VMS Software, for any of the four support packages,grants rights to new major version releases, along with minor versionreleases, patches, updates, etc."How do you interpret that, David?

Well, I'm a bit worried about that. Yes, VSI needs money, now...

I do not know what you know about the VSI finance situation.

When at the IKEA meeting, Johan Gedda (main investor in VSI)talked a bit around the situation. The amount of money spentinto the X86 port so far and how much more it probably neededto get it flying. Actual sums in USD was mentioned. I thinkthe message was that they wasn't in any major crisis or so.But then, what else could he say... :-)

Johan Gedda also talked some about Rocket Software that he co-foundedwith a friend in 1990 to create software for IBM mainframes nowwith over 1.000 employees. http://www.rocketsoftware.com/

I got the impression that Johans income from Rocket helps with thefounding of VSI. As I remember it, he expressed that it had been, ina way, similar backgrounds for both companies. For Rocket it was anumber of software product that IBM wanted to shut down. Rocket tookover them and that has been successfull. In the same way VMS wassomething the owner wanted "out" while there was/is customers stillwanting it to stay. So he saw a similar oportunity there.

Nice guy, of course, as beeing Swedish. :-)Had a chat during lunch.

But ifthey take a bunch of 3-year payments up front, then where will the moneycome from in years 2 and 3?

From the same bunch of payments. Sometimes it can be worth to investa little more in near time to get something ready in the long term.

But then, I thought it was about signing for three years, not toactually pay for three years up-front. I'm not native englishspeaking, so that might be a misinterpretation by me... :-)

Starts to look a bit like those "pyramidschemes". Long term, they fail.But, if they are going to use a support type of billing, then it won'tmatter when someone wants to get support for VMS, they will sell it, that'stheir business. Can't really be any other way.Frankly, even if they are pinched a bit now, and I don't know that, I thinktaking no more than a one year at a time payment would be best, thusinsuring future income. Doesn't do any good to get the port done, just togo belly up because they already spend the support moneys.

Post by Jan-Erik SoderholmAnd yes, it was not clear if the license covered normal LPs thatare used in a typica productin environment, or if it also includesthe compilers. This is a rather special support/licens setup, asI understand.

I'm going to hope that they sell support for everything on productionsystems, and no cost for development and test systems. Now, that gets abit tricky, when someone's business is development, which would sort ofmake their systems "production". But the other side is, development forVMS systems is in VSI's best interest.

Post by Jan-Erik SoderholmSo for our three boxes (prod, test and dev), there would be the samesingle "all-included" licence? Including Fortran, C and Cobol compilersfor the dev box?

That's not as clear. I'd hope that "testing" and "development" wouldbe covered under some sort of developer program. After all, it's inVSI's best interest that you can develop and test on VMS, so that youcan run "production". It is "production" that generates the money,some of which can then be paid to VSI for support.

Indeed, "hotline, gimme an answer Right Now support" may be suitable foryour production boxes, but the only time you are likely to want that fordevelopment or test boxes is when going live to a hard deadline.

so if you've never used Host-Based Volume Shadowing on Alpha, now isyour chance to be dazzled by the wonders of Host-Based Minimerge.If you've never experienced the wonders of cluster formation, andthe tingling feeling one gets at the console when you see the OPCOMmessage "waiting to form or join an OpenVMS Cluster", your wait cansoon be over.

Being a developer, I doubt I have any use of such products, other torecommend they be used when needed ....

But some or all of those can be useful when you have a large andexpensive development team to service.

Post by Jan-Erik SoderholmSo for our three boxes (prod, test and dev), there would be the samesingle "all-included" licence? Including Fortran, C and Cobol compilersfor the dev box?

That's not as clear. I'd hope that "testing" and "development" wouldbe covered under some sort of developer program. After all, it's inVSI's best interest that you can develop and test on VMS, so that youcan run "production". It is "production" that generates the money,some of which can then be paid to VSI for support.

Indeed, "hotline, gimme an answer Right Now support" may be suitable foryour production boxes, but the only time you are likely to want that fordevelopment or test boxes is when going live to a hard deadline.

so if you've never used Host-Based Volume Shadowing on Alpha, now isyour chance to be dazzled by the wonders of Host-Based Minimerge.If you've never experienced the wonders of cluster formation, andthe tingling feeling one gets at the console when you see the OPCOMmessage "waiting to form or join an OpenVMS Cluster", your wait cansoon be over.

Being a developer, I doubt I have any use of such products, other torecommend they be used when needed ....

But some or all of those can be useful when you have a large andexpensive development team to service.

Well, I guess that's possible. My preference is one system per person, so thatwhen I crash it, I don't cause others to lose work, and patience, andforbearance, and ....

Post by Robert A. BrooksIt's my understanding that the license to run the software (theoperating system and layered products) does not have a termination date,such that one can pay for support for, say, three years, but continue torun the software after three years, but without support.

Any idea what the lowest-cost option is? Are there hobbyist options?

Post by Robert A. BrooksYou get the licenses for all the layered products and SIPs, so if you'venever used Host-Based Volume Shadowing on Alpha, now is your chance tobe dazzled by the wonders of Host-Based Minimerge. If you've neverexperienced the wonders of cluster formation, and the tingling feelingone gets at the console when you see the OPCOM message "waiting to formor join an OpenVMS Cluster", your wait can soon be over.

Post by c***@gmail.comhttp://www.vmssoftware.com/pdfs/VSI_Roadmap_20161205.pdfI do not have an updated State of the Port. Sorry about that but I'll try to get to it soon.

Not intending this to be seen as an 'are we there yet?, are we there yet?' statementI was re-reading the last State of the Port and was getting goose bumps at at the level of detail so I thought I'd just ask how the new updated State of the Port is coming along...

The first thing I notice is if you are updating the LLVM version thenyou are going to get into needing to get CMake running on VMS unlessyou are planning to use an intermediate LLVM version which still hadconfigure support.

If you are porting CMake, how are you coming along with it and willthe port be usable on Alpha ?

I know you mentioned it before, but I do like the idea of you bootingfrom a memory disk. Is there any potential there for a site to builda customised memory image for their own uses and would it be possibleto boot to a memory resident filesystem for normal VMS use withoutneeding actual disks ?

Overall, the general feeling I get from the document is that thework is coming along as expected. Well done, and I hope the nextupdate is equally positive. :-)

Simon.

--Simon Clubley, ***@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFPMicrosoft: Bringing you 1980s technology to a 21st century world

Post by Simon ClubleyThe first thing I notice is if you are updating the LLVM version thenyou are going to get into needing to get CMake running on VMS unlessyou are planning to use an intermediate LLVM version which still hadconfigure support.

Post by Simon ClubleyThe first thing I notice is if you are updating the LLVM version thenyou are going to get into needing to get CMake running on VMS unlessyou are planning to use an intermediate LLVM version which still hadconfigure support.

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.os.vms/aglcCW-XTN4/40l2hSXxAwAJ

Yes, I know I've asked the question previously, but that was6 months ago and the situation was more unclear at that time.

I was interested in what the current situation is and John'snow being able to provide a much more detailed answer.

Simon.

--Simon Clubley, ***@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFPMicrosoft: Bringing you 1980s technology to a 21st century world

Post by Simon ClubleyThe first thing I notice is if you are updating the LLVM version thenyou are going to get into needing to get CMake running on VMS unlessyou are planning to use an intermediate LLVM version which still hadconfigure support.If you are porting CMake, how are you coming along with it and willthe port be usable on Alpha ?

Yep. On my radar. Moving forward is a multi-step process. Here are some details:

- We have built LLVM 3.4.2 on OpenVMS Itanium. That was the last release of LLVM that didn't use C++11 syntax in the code base. The clang 3.4.2 compiler does understand C++11 syntax

- This LLVM is the basis for the cross-compilers we'll use to port the OS, etc.

- Once we have a stable version of OpenVMS x86, we'll use the cross clang 3.4.2 to built LLVM 3.8.0 (the last release that supported configure)

- Once we have native LLVM/clang 3.8.0 running on OpenVMS x86, we'll then build CMake and the LLVM/clang du jour. I've looked at the CMake code and spoke to some experts and might see if we can give it a run on OpenVMS Itanium, but I'm suspect that it would work without modification.

- I was still planning on using make and not ninja but I haven't looked at the ninja source code.

- It is unlikely that you'd get the CMake sources to go through the Alpha C++ compiler.

Post by Simon ClubleyThe first thing I notice is if you are updating the LLVM version thenyou are going to get into needing to get CMake running on VMS unlessyou are planning to use an intermediate LLVM version which still hadconfigure support.If you are porting CMake, how are you coming along with it and willthe port be usable on Alpha ?

[snip]

Thank you for the detailed response. That gives me a goodunderstanding of where you are going with this (and when).

Simon.

--Simon Clubley, ***@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFPMicrosoft: Bringing you 1980s technology to a 21st century world

Post by c***@gmail.comhttp://www.vmssoftware.com/pdfs/VSI_Roadmap_20161205.pdfI do not have an updated State of the Port. Sorry about that but I'll try to get to it soon.

Not intending this to be seen as an 'are we there yet?, are we there yet?' statementI was re-reading the last State of the Port and was getting goose bumps at at the level of detail so I thought I'd just ask how the new updated State of the Port is coming along...

State of the Porthttp://vmssoftware.com/updates.html

Awesome

While some of the detail is beyond me, what I do get out of reading this is just how far and wide this is as a project but also, with each update, just how things are gathering together - much like an imploding star, all the materials being drawn in unto itself at an increasing exponential rate until bang! We have VMS-ala-x86-64

To be part of such a project (and more than once for some of you) must give one goosebumps (despite the long hours)!!!

Thanks for the awesome update Clair - really appreciate it :-)

Question: It was mentioned in the notes:

Start Quote:

Now that x86 VMS always boots from memory disk this new code gets plenty of testing from everyday development work and the details are always being fine tuned. We will soon start testing booting1) over the network and2) from DVD.

The memory disk file itself is what gets download rather than individually loading the 100+ individual files as is the current case. The initial memory disk file is created by the VMS build/kitting process.

/End Quote

Does this mean that VMS in the future will be able to be distributed as ISO's fully loaded with particular configurations?

i.e.I can order OpenVMS with C, C++ compiler and a list of say other layered products and I can then grab an ISO of that exact configuration so that I don't need to install the base and the roll forward installing all the products individually?

Having images ready to go in the cloud marketplace is a direction Amazon have already gone and it's good for getting a known state up and running quickly. Amazon of course have gone one step further and created a true marketplace where you can buy other people's images too

I've always thought this is a good idea booting off a self contained image package.

You can add a small extra bit of security too booting from a read-only image. You can perform some type of checksum on the image to make sure it is what you expect to be booting from and can be reasonably certain no-one has tampered with the image file. You could perhaps snapshot a machine image and pack it away for boot next time as well or moving around? I assume if VMS can boot from a static image that it can then capture it's own static image to a file for run-up at another time or another place, in a galaxy far far away?Yes, I know people could do things like fiddle with the check process etc but security is the sum of all the parts, the more we boost the parts the better things are overall

At the VMS local corner shop in the future, we might get asked...'Would you like a cluster with that VMS-x86-64 image Sir or just the regular size'?

Post by c***@gmail.comhttp://www.vmssoftware.com/pdfs/VSI_Roadmap_20161205.pdfI do not have an updated State of the Port. Sorry about that butI'll try to get to it soon.

Not intending this to be seen as an 'are we there yet?, are we there yet?' statementI was re-reading the last State of the Port and was getting goosebumps at at the level of detail so I thought I'd just ask how thenew updated State of the Port is coming along...

State of the Porthttp://vmssoftware.com/updates.html

AwesomeWhile some of the detail is beyond me, what I do get out of reading thisis just how far and wide this is as a project but also, with eachupdate, just how things are gathering together - much like an implodingstar...

Post by IanDDoes this mean that VMS in the future will be able to be distributed as ISO'sfully loaded with particular configurations?i.e. I can order OpenVMS with C, C++ compiler and a list of say other layeredproducts and I can then grab an ISO of that exact configuration so that Idon't need to install the base and the roll forward installing all theproducts individually?

Well, where would you draw the line? Layered products are not part of the OS.Not that I'm in charge, but if I were, I'd "just say no". Such a concept couldgrow all out of proportion. Sure, you may feel you know what should be in abase distribution, but others may have totally different ideas. Much better tokeep things separate.

Now, what I would advocate is that the distribution be complete, includingnetworking, and such. Storage is no longer an issue. Better to includeeverything associated with the OS.

Post by IanDNow that x86 VMS always boots from memory disk this new code gets plenty oftesting from everyday development work and the details are always being finetuned. We will soon start testing booting1) over the network and2) from DVD.The memory disk file itself is what gets download rather than individuallyloading the 100+ individual files as is the current case. The initial memorydisk file is created by the VMS build/kitting process./End QuoteDoes this mean that VMS in the future will be able to be distributed as ISO'sfully loaded with particular configurations?

I think you have misunderstood what is going on with the memory diskreference. VMS requires a primitive boot environment to be availableso it can load the full VMS environment during boot. It also has acore set of files which need to be loaded during that same boot.(the 100+ individual files mentioned by Clair).

This has always been the case in one form or another. For example,back in the VAX days, VMB contained a core set of primitive bootdrivers which VMS could use until enough of itself had been loaded(one file at a time) so that it could switch to using the newlyloaded drivers instead.

What Clair appears to be doing with the memory disk is instead muchcloser to what Linux does with initrd. On Linux, you boot the kerneland a small initrd filesystem (the filesystem is packaged as a singleimage similar in concept to a disk based .iso file).

Linux then mounts this initrd image as it's initial root filesystemand does the first part of the boot from it. Once enough of Linuxhas been booted, Linux then switches it's mounted root filesystem tothe normal on-disk root filesystem.

Clair appears to be doing something very similar with the memory diskand it raises the very interesting question about if it would bepossible to run a normal but customised site specific VMS environmentfrom it without ever needing to load any other files during the boot.

Post by IanDi.e.I can order OpenVMS with C, C++ compiler and a list of say other layeredproducts and I can then grab an ISO of that exact configuration so thatI don't need to install the base and the roll forward installing all theproducts individually?

No. That's what a decent package manager is for. BTW, PCSI does notqualify as a decent package manager by today's standards.

Simon.

--Simon Clubley, ***@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFPMicrosoft: Bringing you 1980s technology to a 21st century world

Post by IanDNow that x86 VMS always boots from memory disk this new code getsplenty of testing from everyday development work and the details arealways being fine tuned. We will soon start testing booting1) over the network and2) from DVD.The memory disk file itself is what gets download rather thanindividually loading the 100+ individual files as is the current case.The initial memory disk file is created by the VMS build/kittingprocess./End QuoteDoes this mean that VMS in the future will be able to be distributed asISO's fully loaded with particular configurations?

I think you have misunderstood what is going on with the memory diskreference. VMS requires a primitive boot environment to be available soit can load the full VMS environment during boot. It also has a coreset of files which need to be loaded during that same boot. (the 100+individual files mentioned by Clair).This has always been the case in one form or another. For example, backin the VAX days, VMB contained a core set of primitive boot driverswhich VMS could use until enough of itself had been loaded (one file ata time) so that it could switch to using the newly loaded driversinstead.

Some VAX configurations booted using a virtual disk. It's not at alla new approach for the bootstrap, even with OpenVMS.

What is being implemented would be excellent fodder for some futurearticle in Sue's eventual technical journal offering. This as detailsof the bootstrap are always interesting to some technical folks, andmarketing benefits can be accrued. Would have been nice to record theboot camp sessions that discussed this stuff and post that, too. Butbacking up a step or three, these details are about as fundamentallyrelevant to most folks that will be using OpenVMS on x86-64 as theinnards of how IPB interacts with EFI are relevant to folks usingOpenVMS on Itanium.

The new boot manager that's been discussed once or twice and at bootcamp, and that the new boot manager hopefully reduces the exposure tothe EFI user interface? Now that's far more interesting to(experienced) system managers, because we're going to be dealingdirectly with that. It's also a good spot to build some package andpatch management, as well as access to backup and othermaintenance-related tools. (The client and server systems I commonlyuse have this capability already, provide more than I've discussedhere, works very nicely, and completely avoids the need to visit EFI.)

Post by Simon ClubleyClair appears to be doing something very similar with the memory diskand it raises the very interesting question about if it would bepossible to run a normal but customised site specific VMS environmentfrom it without ever needing to load any other files during the boot.

They're keeping the boot disk around for crashes, too. It's how thecrashdumps can access what should be a valid and uncorrupted system,and write the encrypted crash data out to the local disk or the localdump server host, or (eventually, hopefully, opt-in, yada yada) encryptthe dump and write the most interesting bits to some remote crashserver at VSI. I'm working with systems that already (user-optionally)upload application crash data and system crash data, too.

Post by IanDi.e.I can order OpenVMS with C, C++ compiler and a list of say otherlayered products and I can then grab an ISO of that exact configurationso that I don't need to install the base and the roll forwardinstalling all the products individually?

No. That's what a decent package manager is for. BTW, PCSI does notqualify as a decent package manager by today's standards.

Package and dependency management, or containers. Where appropriate,client systems can further implement self-service here via Munki orotherwise, and authorized folks can load packages on servers.

Folks are getting away from monolithic disk images, too. That workscertainly, but it's a morass of permutations, and you're going to beregenerating the images every time you change something and wheneveryou're deploying security patches and updates; OpenSSL or ISC BIND orApache and any number of other hunks commonly found on OpenVMS can getrush updates, and some packages and some environments follow morefrequent or even continuous deployment strategies, even for their ownapplications. But whether you use monolithic images, or thin images,or self-service, or if you customize the OpenVMS installation DVDs withyour own bits, or the (why is this even separate from the baseinstallation?) factory-installed-software FIS installation approach,use what works best for your local needs.

Post by Simon ClubleyWhat Clair appears to be doing with the memory disk is instead muchcloser to what Linux does with initrd. On Linux, you boot the kerneland a small initrd filesystem (the filesystem is packaged as a singleimage similar in concept to a disk based .iso file).

On IA64, satellite and InfoServer boot work this way today. The difference is in how the memory disk is populated. Today the files are requested one at a time via TFTP until the 135-or-so files that *might* be needed are loaded into the memory disk.

X86 will boot from a (container) file that houses all the required drivers and execlets and other bits needed to get started. This allows checksumming and (in the case of installation media) signing of the memory disk image. Network boot will need to request only a single file. If UEFI can use the device (disk, USB, or NIC) then you'll probably be able to boot from it.

Post by IanDNow that x86 VMS always boots from memory disk this new code gets plenty oftesting from everyday development work and the details are always being finetuned. We will soon start testing booting1) over the network and2) from DVD.The memory disk file itself is what gets download rather than individuallyloading the 100+ individual files as is the current case. The initial memorydisk file is created by the VMS build/kitting process./End QuoteDoes this mean that VMS in the future will be able to be distributed as ISO'sfully loaded with particular configurations?

I think you have misunderstood what is going on with the memory diskreference. VMS requires a primitive boot environment to be availableso it can load the full VMS environment during boot. It also has acore set of files which need to be loaded during that same boot.(the 100+ individual files mentioned by Clair).This has always been the case in one form or another. For example,back in the VAX days, VMB contained a core set of primitive bootdrivers which VMS could use until enough of itself had been loaded(one file at a time) so that it could switch to using the newlyloaded drivers instead.What Clair appears to be doing with the memory disk is instead muchcloser to what Linux does with initrd. On Linux, you boot the kerneland a small initrd filesystem (the filesystem is packaged as a singleimage similar in concept to a disk based .iso file).Linux then mounts this initrd image as it's initial root filesystemand does the first part of the boot from it. Once enough of Linuxhas been booted, Linux then switches it's mounted root filesystem tothe normal on-disk root filesystem.Clair appears to be doing something very similar with the memory diskand it raises the very interesting question about if it would bepossible to run a normal but customised site specific VMS environmentfrom it without ever needing to load any other files during the boot.

Post by IanDi.e.I can order OpenVMS with C, C++ compiler and a list of say other layeredproducts and I can then grab an ISO of that exact configuration so thatI don't need to install the base and the roll forward installing all theproducts individually?

No. That's what a decent package manager is for. BTW, PCSI does notqualify as a decent package manager by today's standards.Simon.--Microsoft: Bringing you 1980s technology to a 21st century world

Simon (and others),

Have you come across Bitnami or anything similar?

Something like Bitnami is what I took from IanD'squestion about pre-configured ready-to-deploy ISOsready to download. That's rather different fromyour interpretation. I have no idea which one wasactually intended :)

Bitnami's business is hosted applications, lots ofdifferent ones, and as a taster and/or to get theirname in front of potential customers, they offer lotsof different applications and application mixes, ovenready, on downloadable ISOs. Load and go. Some arefor trial purposes, some are the kind of thing youcould deploy on (preferably on their hosted services).

Ignoring the offsite hosting issues, I've no idea ifthis "try before you buy" idea is a sensible mid termmodel for VSI and its business partners, but as a wayto *easily* get VMS/x86 in front of potential customers,it's perhaps an interesting technological approach.

Maybe even more simply (in some respects), maybesomething like a few VMware appliances (or similar)configured for a few different kinds of VMS purchaser,in sectors which VSI (or partners) think might beinteresting. E.g. the requirements (from VMS) for adistributed automation/SCADA customer may not beentirely similar to those of a centralised (butreplicated) financial trading customer, which maynot be the same as... y'know.

In parallel, there's also the question of licencingbut that's a different department altogether. Maybethere is a case for resurrecting Temporary ServicePAKs...

No, not yet. I know this kind of thing exists, but the clouddeployment stuff is something I have not had a real need for yet.

I can however see all these custom images spiraling way out ofcontrol in terms of the long term operating/security costsunless you are very careful.

Post by j***@yahoo.co.ukSomething like Bitnami is what I took from IanD'squestion about pre-configured ready-to-deploy ISOsready to download. That's rather different fromyour interpretation. I have no idea which one wasactually intended :)Bitnami's business is hosted applications, lots ofdifferent ones, and as a taster and/or to get theirname in front of potential customers, they offer lotsof different applications and application mixes, ovenready, on downloadable ISOs. Load and go. Some arefor trial purposes, some are the kind of thing youcould deploy on (preferably on their hosted services).Ignoring the offsite hosting issues, I've no idea ifthis "try before you buy" idea is a sensible mid termmodel for VSI and its business partners, but as a wayto *easily* get VMS/x86 in front of potential customers,it's perhaps an interesting technological approach.

The stuff on the Bitnami website seems to be more aboutpre-packaged application packages instead of operatingsystem instances.

Perhaps having easily downloadable live DVDs with limitedlifetime licences might be a better way to go for VMS.

So, does anyone else think having restricted licence liveDVDs might be a good way to get VMS in front of peopleonce the x86-64 port becomes generally available ?

Simon.

--Simon Clubley, ***@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFPMicrosoft: Bringing you 1980s technology to a 21st century world

Post by j***@yahoo.co.ukHave you come across Bitnami or anything similar?Something like Bitnami is what I took from IanD'squestion about pre-configured ready-to-deploy ISOsready to download. That's rather different fromyour interpretation. I have no idea which one wasactually intended :)Bitnami's business is hosted applications, lots ofdifferent ones, and as a taster and/or to get theirname in front of potential customers, they offer lotsof different applications and application mixes, ovenready, on downloadable ISOs. Load and go. Some arefor trial purposes, some are the kind of thing youcould deploy on (preferably on their hosted services).

I have not heard of this offering but it is along the lines of what I was thinking

Perhaps people need to look at things like Amazon machine images to get an idea of what is already available today

https://aws.amazon.com/amis/oracle/

These are just some of the oracle specific offerings. Other vendors do the same. The AWS marketplace has over 500 pre-configured AMI (Amazon Machine Image) pre-made packages. I was not thinking of lots of different combinations, that gets unmanageable but some might be nice at least.

You might even get to the stage where an iso of the OS is distributed encrypted and unlocked and run in a secure memory model, the same with vendor releases as well. Isn't this partially what we do for the boot kernel? Why stop there?

VMS is going to have to look at things no-one else is doing and lever them. Just porting to x86 and doing what everyone else is doing isn't going to save the platform IMO - the momentum is already landsliding towards linux, VMS needs to give businesses out there a reason to go VMS. Driving down costs through more flexible licensing would be a good thing

Post by IanDI have not heard of this offering but it is along the lines of what I was thinkingPerhaps people need to look at things like Amazon machine images toget an idea of what is already available todayhttps://aws.amazon.com/amis/oracle/These are just some of the oracle specific offerings. Other vendorsdo the same. The AWS marketplace has over 500 pre-configured AMI(Amazon Machine Image) pre-made packages. I was not thinking of lotsof different combinations, that gets unmanageable but some might benice at least.You might even get to the stage where an iso of the OS is distributedencrypted and unlocked and run in a secure memory model, the samewith vendor releases as well. Isn't this partially what we do for theboot kernel? Why stop there?VMS is going to have to look at things no-one else is doing and leverthem. Just porting to x86 and doing what everyone else is doing isn'tgoing to save the platform IMO - the momentum is already landslidingtowards linux, VMS needs to give businesses out there a reason to goVMS. Driving down costs through more flexible licensing would be agood thing

SNAP!

AWS, Azure, Google cloud need to be leveraged if VMS is to survive.

I really hope VSI has been talking to Amazon about VMS and desired stateconfiguration.

Post by Richard MaherSNAP!AWS, Azure, Google cloud need to be leveraged if VMS is to survive.I really hope VSI has been talking to Amazon about VMS and desired stateconfiguration.

It's been mentioned that VMS playing in the cloud is a major direction for VMS and it's customers

It also makes me wonder, where clusters will feature in the cloud

I know VMS has things like ICC and other frameworks that can piggyback on low level cluster related 'stuff' but I don't really recall any applications that were really cluster based other than ran multiple copies of itself on various nodes and shared a common data source as though it was local (no concept of farming operations out across a cluster for distributed workloads or I/O splitting)

it seems to me that VMS clustering mainly get's used for disk redundancy (since processes need to log in again if a machine goes down). Yes, having multiple nodes running an application is enhancing application availability but if one has to restart a job / log-in again, you don't really have fault tolerance

With the likes of Hadoop and it's 'friends' (like Cassandra as a distributed DB with redundancy) I'm having a hard time thinking of what advantage VMS clusters in cloud environments will actually have over applications written for large scale linux clusters that do redundancy through duplication since spinning up other nodes in linux cloud land is cheap and quick

With the likes of Hadoop and it's 'friends' basically creating a means of clustered applications, is the VMS cluster past it's used by date in the cloud environment and if not, how to use it's core technology to give the world something it cannot get now (and pay for!) ?

Enlighten me because I'm starting to get the feeling that the good old VMS cluster is on the endangered species list, at least in cloud environments or is it a niche offering that business will pay for in that environment?

Post by Richard MaherI really hope VSI has been talking to Amazon about VMS and desiredstate configuration.

It's been mentioned that VMS playing in the cloud is a major

direction

for VMS and it's customersIt also makes me wonder, where clusters will feature in the cloudI know VMS has things like ICC and other frameworks that canpiggyback on low level cluster related 'stuff' but I don't really

recall any

applications that were really cluster based other than ran multiplecopies of itself on various nodes and shared a common data source asthough it was local (no concept of farming operations out across acluster for distributed workloads or I/O splitting)it seems to me that VMS clustering mainly get's used for diskredundancy (since processes need to log in again if a machine goesdown). Yes, having multiple nodes running an application is

enhancing

application availability but if one has to restart a job / log-in

again, you

don't really have fault toleranceWith the likes of Hadoop and it's 'friends' (like Cassandra as adistributed DB with redundancy) I'm having a hard time thinking ofwhat advantage VMS clusters in cloud environments will actually haveover applications written for large scale linux clusters that doredundancy through duplication since spinning up other nodes in

linux

cloud land is cheap and quickSurely VMS clustering will need to undergo some fairly major changesand/or licensing revamps? dynamic cluster licences etc? Sliding

scale

licensing?With the likes of Hadoop and it's 'friends' basically creating a

means of

clustered applications, is the VMS cluster past it's used by date in

the

cloud environment and if not, how to use it's core technology to

give

the world something it cannot get now (and pay for!) ?Enlighten me because I'm starting to get the feeling that the good

old

VMS cluster is on the endangered species list, at least in cloudenvironments or is it a niche offering that business will pay for in

that

environment?

Need to think about the developers .. yes, after many years of neglectby its previous owners, OpenVMS obviously needs to catch-up in anumber of areas.

However, UNIX/Windows developers today have to code most of their HA,data consistency, node mgmt. (node add/deletes), data sharding, datarouting from app to db, replication etc. in their Application code.Think of the complexity and additional work associated with this. Thisis primarily because of the shared nothing cluster model. Yes, theshared nothing model does have advantages in some areas, but there arealso loads of cons as well.

With OpenVMS, a great deal of this complexity is handled at the OSlayer in its shared disk cluster model (OpenVMS, Linux/GFS, z/OS).Yes, one does need to follow OpenVMS cluster programmingrecommendations, but that is no different than any platform. Clustercode takes care of node add/deletes, HBVS handles data consistency,cluster logicals takes care of resource transparency, when the loadincreases, simply add nodes with ZERO impact or changes required onapplication code. And each application group might decide to do thesethings differently.

To understand what shared nothing developers have to go through intheir app development, reference the following video by a formerTwitter SW Engineer:

Also reference the following which plays really well in a much morecentralized environment:http://highscalability.com/blog/2015/10/12/making-the-case-for-building-scalable-stateful-services-in-t.html

Its also important to remember that public clouds are just anothername for outsourcing with all of the pros and cons associated withoutsourcing. Public vs private clouds are simply business modelswhereby you pay someone else to provide heavily standardized ITservices or you pay one internal dept. to provide standardized, butmuch more custom to meet company requirements, IT services for all ofthe company via internal resources, processes and technologies.

Post by IanDEnlighten me because I'm starting to get the feeling that the good old VMS cluster is on the endangered species list, at least in cloud environments or is it a niche offering that business will pay for in that environment?

See Are clusters passe` https://groups.google.com/forum/#!activity/comp.os.vms/4aQgQPUNAgAJ/comp.os.vms/91qRIIRpv1s/FhiSWV9XEAAJ